February 7, 2006 CCP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

correction order. She said it is not subject to a DRAFT directive, so it is not subject to appeal. t She said misinformation was giveny administrative Sessing. She said she came to the City over one year ago. Meetings and hours of testimony resulted in this directive. Mr. Sessing has never said he meets the Code. She asked the Council to ask Jerry Filla to add these to the complaint at Washington County. She said they did not move the down he business. There is still storage onsite. She said nobody wants 600 feet of PVC pip their property line. It is a structure that was constructed and it runs in and out of their property. She said the Code allows for retaining walls and landscaping of sod, seed, mulch and plantings. Everyone sees it is not a fence. It is not a fence based on Jerry Filla's definitions. She does not want to argue it again for a fifth time. With all the drainage issues, it has to be fixed. Mr. Sessing should not be allowed to do what nobody else is allowed to do. Fieldstone resolution was suspect because it was based on a Code that was going to be give permission again. He should not be allowed to have permission a second time fochanged but never was. If he has to remove all of it to repair the grading, then Council has to something that never should have been allowed the first time. r The Mayor closed the hearing at 10:17 p.m. Councilmember DeLapp asked if this is a viable hearing. Is the storage and business out of the house? Is the electric fence illegal or relevant? Is what we are doing permissible from a legal standpoint? Councilmember Smith said the Council has gone through this over and over, and we have seen the pictures. We had no appeal for the drainage and gutters so she is not sure it is justified. She said the pictures submitted are illegal because there are no measurements. M/S/P, Smith/Conlin, To deny the appeal and move forward and add the four items to our lawsuit. Councilmember Conlin asked if this appeal is justified. Give the applicant the chance to appeal and make a decision. Councilmember DeLapp asked if we learned something that we did not know before. He made the motion for that past resolution. Councilmember Smith said a motion was made to use it as a landscaping material not for a retaining wall. There is no documentation for it. Councilmember DeLapp asked if the motion he made then was for approval of fieldstone landscaping, The City Attorney said Mr. Sessing did not add any more after that. He does not recall photographs from that time and the minutes don't reflect it. There was also an issue of erosion that this landscaping was going to correct. The Mayor called the question. VOTE: 4:1 Nay-DeLapp He said his was a throwaway vote, and he is not convinced we have thoroughly addressed all the issues. He thought he saw photographs of it seven years ago. The City Attorney will make an amendment to the lawsuit for six additional issues. Lake Elmo City Council Minutes of January 17, 2006 12